Notes on contributors

American political science has recently undergone a process of self-criticism principally illustrated by the so-called "Perestroika movement." This article suggests turning to Pierre Bourdieu's sociology of science to clarify some of the mechanisms that contribute to this perceived malaise, beyond the most visible and well-known debate over the supremacy of quantitative methods. In particular, in light of his analysis of the scientific field and his key concept of scientific capital, four major structuring dimensions of American political science are reviewed: academic status, research fields, sociological characteristics and political allegiances. The author then reflects upon the existence of an "establishment" in the discipline.